Image courtesy of EcoVillageGreen.com
My biggest problem with “Go Green” initiatives (and the plain ol’ “environmentally friendly” ones before them) is that well-intentioned people jump on them without considering their impact because no one wants to be seen as hurting the environment.
We’ve all heard stories about how the environmental impact of recycling material can be greater than properly disposing of it, or how the manufacturing process of electric or hybrid cars can do more harm to the environment than their benefit can offset.
Here’s another one to add to your list: Compact fluorescent light bulbs. You know, the kind that replace the old-fashioned incandescent kind. A recent New York Times article suggests that the bulbs may not be ready for prime time and may not even be as green as the hype would suggest. Problems in manufacturing mean many of the bulbs don’t deliver on their performance promises. Limitations in the technology mean the bulbs are poorly suited for many common household uses. They could even be dangerous: Since the bulbs take up to a minute or more to reach full brightness, they could pose a tripping hazard and lead to injuries. And perhaps worst of all, the bulbs contain dangerous chemicals and are supposed to be disposed of only at special centers, not in regular household trash–a practice many consumers are ignoring, and which could more than offset any environmental benefit if people have to drive long distances to bring the burnt-out bulbs where they can be safely disposed of.
There’s more information in the full Times article, which can be read here. (Free registration may be required.)
Share on Facebook
